What's Wrong with Calvinism Part V
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2012
- Part five of a series of theological discussions in which Dr. Jerry L. Walls explains what is wrong with Calvinism. In the previous video, he and Paul Sloan explored the essential background to understand Romans 9. In this video, he and Paul focus on Romans 9, the most controversial text in the Bible with respect to the doctrines of predestination and election. They show why this text, rightly understood, teaches something very different than the Calvinist account of these important Biblical doctrines.
![อยู่ได้แล้ว - LIPTA feat. Mirrr [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-9-hpntNym4/mqdefault.jpg)
ahhhhhhh! I have a big sigh of relief now. Thank you for all of your time invested in reading theological writings, history, and the Word itself. We need scholars to help us understand texts like this. You are a gift from God. Keep up the good work!
Read Jeremiah 18. The presumption made if quickly reading over Rom 9 is that the clay is passive but all OT references to the Potter and Clay actually is God shaping in response to the faith or rebellion of people. In Jer 18, it says 'if you repent he will relent' - changing his previous plan of destruction.
Amazing what a little context will do for biblical interpretation. awesome.
Very illuminating. Very biblical. This seems indicative of what William Lane Craig calls the Jewish Reclamation of the Scripture from a German, ethnocentric theology that would just as soon forget about the nation of Israel.
That was a awesome job of show Romans 9 that the Calvinist use to beat us up. The
one that don't agree with them may God Bless you .
i had a puritan, presbyterian, reformed, covenanter confessional man who did not have assurance. i told him after almost a yr of learning about calv, that he was in a pickle cuz that would mean that God hates him. i can no longer argue w him and gave him up to God but too bad. i wish he had knowledge and experience of the FATHER IN HEAVEN'S LOVE! ITS WEIRD HOW THEY DON'T MENTION JESUS but its all about the wrathful. terrible God. i called him ''comeback'' curtis cuz he always had a line to fight
For Paul and Dr. Walls, wasn't the original Romans as written by Paul a long text that was later divided into chapters? I agree with your message, but it seemed like you were basing a part of your argument on the fact that Chapters 9 and 10 began and ended talking about Israel. That would be irrelevant if Paul wrote it as one continuous letter that was later divided by someone else into chapters.
Great insights...this is the bext contextual interpretation of Romans 9!
Wider context, Paul refers to Pharaoh and the concept of some being hardened in order to be destroyed. If someone opposes God, and then God hardens them and destroys them, they have no right to complain.
The nations argument is just a blatant decision to ignore the text.
Romans 9:6-7
6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.”
How can God's choice be about nations when the text plainly states the promise is not according to nations?!
Great video
This is really good!
Thanks!!!
No. Jerry Walls refutes Univeralists. Check 'Faith Under Fire." or His book "The Logic of Damnation".
do you interpret romans 11:25-26 all Israel as ethnic Jews? The amillennial/ partial preterist view is a better way to understand the bible. Israel ended when the veil was torn and then 40 years God waited for them to repent, destroyed the nation ( and probably the true ethnic decendants) in 70 ad. Ever since then, Judaism has been a babylonian cult and not the biblical faith, much like islam. dispensationalism or premill is deterministic as calvinism is.
Also, katertismena (paraphrased into eng pron) is a PASSIVE VERB, meaning it was done to them and not of their own doing otherwise it would be a reflexive verb using a passive verb participle however this is not the case. The verb is also in the perfect past tense, which means it an action that was done, finished at one point in time in history, not as though they STILL could be deserving of it, if it had been initially based on their own rebellion as the video eisegetes unwarrentedly.
absolutely fantastic. never heard this laid out so clearly and sensibly. irrefutable. makes calvin look like a preschool child learning his alphabet.
Many of your comments speak to the importance of reading chap 9 in its true context of chap 9-11 being for Israel. Would the full context of Romans 9 not include the entire book, which is speaking of personal salvation? It seems difficult to read chap 1-8 as applying to personal salvation, and chap 12-16 as personal responses to salvation, while claiming Romans 9-11 do not apply to personal salvation, all the while claiming the the application of 9-11 to personal salvation is "out of context".
He addresses it in the teaching about the potter. Jeremiah is assured of God's right to form Israel as he sees fit.
check out refuting calvinism channel calvinism strongholds- Romans 9. It goes through the whole chapter
It is not a better way to understand the Bible because that interpretation was not delivered to the churches by the Apostles. Early common (ie, catholic or general or universal) tradition was historic premillenialism. Not one single father or bishop of any church founded by apostles ever contended that the events of Revelation were past.
are these guys universalists?
This is talking about an individual, not a federal head:
So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump done vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?
Romans 9:19-21
You do not understand the bible, you know the word but need to understand the process. We are in heaven all ready in spirit resting from our work. I cant explain it, it would take too long why I get a total different understanding. You stirred me up , and reopened old wounds. It is not about using the Word to tear down but to build up. If God teaches a man thru painstaking meditation how can he unlearn. If any of the bible saints failed to obey, we would not be here. Thank God for election. ,
The comparison of Israel to an individual king is not exactly parallel. God hardened an individual (Pharaoh), whereas he hardened a group (Israel). God's intention was never to save Pharaoh or soften his heart so he could be saved. His purpose was to display his glory. In Exodus 4:21 it says that God planned to harden Pharaohs heart! How could Pharaoh have come to repentance apart from the grace and purpose of God?
The biggest misrepresentation that is made about those who hold to the biblical doctrine that God chooses in salvation is the idea that we know who the elect are and who the reprobate are. The fact is that nobody but God knows who the elect are before they are saved. God does not tell us who the elect are before they are saved. Anybody could be one of God's elect until the day they die Unless they have committed the unpardonable sin publicly.
This guy cracks me up. Listen to how convinced they are of themselves. They do so much work to avoid the obvious. Even in context, especially with the logical flow of Paul's arguments in Romans 9, he is still talking about individuals. Grant them their point however and you are STILL left with a God choosing one people group over another. Even with Paul JUST saying back in v. 6-7 that he is now narrowing Israel down to those who are TRUE Israel, not an entire national people group. The density.
no
Notice how he just skips over the heart of Romans nine --the very parts that absolutely fry the Armenians. What a smoke screen.
It is amazing how that unregenerate hearts are so focused on their opposition of predestination election and God's choosing in salvation unconditionally. It drives them crazy.
Careful study of all the texts brings you to the clear conclusion that Christ died for his sheep, that God chooses in salvation, and that all that God intends to save will be saved. And this is very offensive to sinful men.
Sorry Lastcall, you are not an Elect, unless you are a Jew, and even then, you would only be elected to bear witness of God's plan, not unto salvation.
1 Corinthians 3:18
Do not deceive yourselves. If any of you think you are wise by the standards of this age, you should become “fools” so that you may become wise.